UML14 — Profile Notation

I raised this issue at the AB level. I didn't recommend holding up approval
of UML 1.4 over this but we agreed that the new RTF would take this matter
up with dispatch.

Pages 3-59 to 3-63 (Section 3.35): The new notation for defining Stereotypes
and TaggedValues (i.e. for defining a Virtual Metamodel or "VMM") raises an
issue. I can speak to this as a practical matter based on the profiling
work I've done. When I define a Stereotype on a UML metamodel element, as
in figure 3-32 on p. 3-61, I would like to reuse the official OMG definition
of the UML metamodel element. I don't want to have to define it again
before defining the relationship between my new Stereotype and that UML
metamodel element. Thus, requiring the <<metaclass>> Stereotype on the UML
metamodel element means that, in the UML metamodel itself, I would have to
Stereotype all the metaclasses this way so that, if I need to, I can reuse
them in VMMs. True, I could opt not to display the <<metaclass>>
Stereotype in a pure UML metamodel diagram and opt to display it a VMM
diagram, but all the UML metamodel elements would be carrying the
<<metaclass>> Stereotype.

The best solution I can think of to this problem is to to drop the
requirement to use the <<metaclass>> Stereotype in VMM diagrams. As long as
the requirement to use the <<stereotype>> Stereotype on Stereotypes (sic!)
is adhered to, it should be pretty clear in a VMM diagram what is a
Stereotype and what is a UML metamodel element. Also, the the standard
metamodel Stereotype of Package indicates that the elements in the
Package are elements of a metamodel.

I am open to other suggestions as to how to resolve this issue.

resolved, close issue